Deduction, process

Mechanisms. Mechanism is a technical term, referring to a detailed, microscopic description of a chemical transformation. Although it falls far short of a complete dynamical description of a reaction at the atomic level, a mechanism has been the most information available. In particular, a mechanism for a reaction is sufficient to predict the macroscopic rate law of the reaction. This deductive process is vaUd only in one direction, ie, an unlimited number of mechanisms are consistent with any measured rate law. A successful kinetic study, therefore, postulates a mechanism, derives the rate law, and demonstrates that the rate law is sufficient to explain experimental data over some range of conditions. New data may be discovered later that prove inconsistent with the assumed rate law and require that a new mechanism be postulated. Mechanisms state, in particular, what molecules actually react in an elementary step and what products these produce. An overall chemical equation may involve a variety of intermediates, and the mechanism specifies those intermediates. For the overall equation... 

The analysis of the branching structure turns the preceding deduction process around. We have all the facts available to us at the end of the solution synthesis, i.e., at the end of solving a particular problem. Our task is to select and connect subsets of those facts to prove new results that are useful for deriving new control information. In essence, we have to turn facts about solutions and partial solutions at lower levels in the tree, into constraints on the properties of states and alphabet interpretations higher in the tree. 

Why did we not continue the deduction process beyond these particular predicates Also, we continued to expand the end-time predicate,... 

The first of these issues is known as operationality (Minton et al., 1990) and will be discussed in Section V. The second problem requires us to equip the deduction process with a means to know when deductions are irrelevant, or to change the way the conditions are expressed to avoid the problem altogether. In general, neither of these solutions can be accomplished in a domain independent way. However, the latter solution confines the domain dependency to the conditions themselves, rather than the deduction mechanism, and thus is preferred. 

Extrapolating from prior examples of group formation to future possibilities is a deductive process, and so it is perhaps not so unusual to bring Arthur Conan Doyle s Sherlock Holmes into the discussion. As devoted readers will testify, Conan Doyle s stories are filled with physical details, particularly those relating to the persons and behaviors of his characters. Some of those physical traits are immediately observable to other characters in the stories, whereas other physical traits are apparent only after their logical relation to human actions are made evident by Holmes. 

In the deductive process of identifying root causes, known facts are assembled and used to develop and test one or more possible scenarios. The process normally requires multiple iterations of the cycle shown in Figure 9-9 until at least one plausible scenario is identified that fits all the known facts. 

The next item in the loop is a decision point for possibly introducing the use of inductive reasoning methods into the deliberations. If the deductive process continues to indicate progress, then additional facts are procured or the logic tree is restructured. For example, one witness stated a particular valve was open, yet the post-incident inspection found it to be closed. The team must be careful to ensure that the valve is closed because of the actions taken prior to the incident, and not as a result of post-event response activities. The position of this particular valve may be a critical item in determining which of two scenarios is the more probable case. The incident investigation team would then initiate a short-term action item to conduct a mini-investigation to resolve this question. 

If the deductive process has stalled and no further progress seems possible or likely, then the iterative loop calls for application of inductive investigation methods such as a checklist or HAZOP. The inductive methods may also benefit from use of the fact/hypothesis matrix tool described in this chapter. 

Summary A careful consideration of merits and limitations of these two methods leads us to conclude that Inductive Method is the fore-runner of Deductive Method. For effective teaching of chemistry, both inductive and deductive approaches should be used because no one is complete without the other. Induction leaves the learner at a point where he cannot stop and the after work has to be done and completed by deduction. Deduction is a process that is particularly suitable for final statement and induction is most suitable for exploration fields. Induction gives the lead and deduction follows. In chemistry if we want to teach about composition of water then its composition is determined by a endiometer tube (inductive process) and confirmed by the process of electrolysis of water (deductive process). 

Then, by considering the deduction process mentioned above, the mass spectra of those three peaks (1,2, and 3) were carefully interprefed. Figure 3.18... 

Major scientific theories are, then, created by efforts of human imagination they are created like works of art. The development of the theories into a particular field involves patient work, thought and experimentation, as Popper suggests. The fundamental hypotheses or axioms are obviously synthetic as defined in Section 2.1 and are a posteriori to observation and thought. However, if these hypotheses are used to deduce other results, that deductive process is analytic as we shall now discuss. 

The procedure relies on building a tree structure as shown in Figure 36-3. At the top is the principal or top undesired event. The tree continues by breaking the event into contributing factors and further subdividing them into event causes. Fault tree analysis is a deductive process that moves from the general to the specific. A tree chart considers the causal chain of factors leading to the top event. Interactions between events and elements of the system are a vital part of this method. 

Figure 3.2. Formalized diagram of the deductive process for identification of the base kinetic model of chemical reactions.

The present study is characterised as exploratory, and its objective is to offer a picture that can make the deduction process easy of pertinent subjects in the investigation of a phenomenon (Tripodi et al, 1981). This kind of study has a descriptive character and phenomenon exploitation, in this case, two vertical partnerships in beef supply chain. 

Fault Tree Analysis is a deductive process to identify casual factors which contribute to a specific undesired event (Modarres, 2006, lEC/ISO 31010, 2009). It is probably the most common assessment... 

Clearly, the choice of the functions E, H, A, or G is governed by the experimental conditions. For example, when temperature and pressure are under experimental control, one chooses the Gibbs free energy as the appropriate function of state from which to make further deductions. Processes carried out under adiabatic and constant pressure conditions are to be characterized by the enthalpy state function. We now show how the above functions of state may be determined experimentally, and how to choose the appropriate one with which to work under the selected operating conditions. 

Remark 1 The most important advantage of GDEE compared to the traditional equations, e.g., the EPK equation, is that the dimension is totally untied from the original dynamical system. Actually, although Eq. 10 is in one dimension, from the above heuristic deduction process, it is clear that if any arbitrary number of... 

---